Can Derek support his comment below by reference to specific remarks in Benjamin's essay, re "Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction"?
(I'm not an expertly informed fan of Benjamin but his views have had enormous influence that must be recognized. He was a depressive, a troubled man, a suicide, and I wonder if that had anything to do with his pessimism re art). Perhaps Derek can explain it all. Since he's so summative in his off-handed remark about Benjamin he must have a deep well of knowledge about the man and his era. WC --- Derek Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > RE: "And the thread did begin with Benjamin (?) > talking about the > "THE" concept of > "authentic" where, to this moment, I'm not sure > which notion he had in mind." > > Don't worry, Cheerskep. Neither did he. > > DA > > On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 5:26 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > In a message dated 6/28/08 7:59:38 PM, William > writes: > > > >> Just hold on a second, Cheerskep. One may refer > to > >> THE concept in a discussion of a particular > concept. > >> One does not need to acknowledge all concepts or > >> remind the reader that A concept simply means one > of > >> many, each time an already identified concept is > >> mentioned. > >> > > I don't disagree with your core thought here, > William, which is to say we can > > have a serviceably clear discussion once the > particular notion behind a given > > word-use is effectively described. For example, > if, when we are talking about > > the "authenticity" of a given painting, all of us > agree the notion intended > > is "painted by the painter to whom the work is > ascribed", we can get along all > > right. But in the thread about 'authentic' it was > clear that listers were > > frequently talking at cross purposes -- especially > when the focus drifted from > > painting to "literature". "Jones was the authentic > voice of the American > > South." > > "Smith's dialog simply isn't authentic. No one > talks that way --" etc. > > > > And the thread did begin with Benjamin (?) talking > about the "THE" concept of > > "authentic" where, to this moment, I'm not sure > which notion he had in mind. > > But the thread spurted ahead as though everyone > were talking about the same > > thing. So I was just trying to teach you young > fellers some safety techniques. > > (See my original below.) I myself have tended to > stick to the word 'notion' > > rather than 'concept' for the very reason that our > minds are less ready to > > "objectify", "reify", a notion. But 'concept' is > almost never used without the > > definite article 'the' in front of it. And danger > lies that way. > > > > I know I often mistype common words in these > postings, but when it's a tricky > > word, I'm more inclined to pay attention. Thus > when you write, "Put away your > > badge and have a sasprilila," as resident > word-sheriff I feel compelled to > > reply that it has been a very long time since I've > had a sarsaparilla. > >> > >> > >> > >> WC > >> > >> > >> --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> > >> > Chris is right to condemn this: > >> > > "THE concept of.." rather than "A concept > of.." > >> > > > >> > And Saul is right when he says, > >> > > >> > " There are other notions of authenticity such > as > >> > being true and > >> > trustworthy,validated, genuine or that it > >> > corresponds to a given model, or > >> > is of a given period, or that it is what it > >> > represents itself to be -" > >> > > >> > Whenever anyone talks of "THE concept of > authentic" > >> > or "THE meaning of > >> > authentic" or "THE notion of authentic", you > should > >> > immediately get suspicious > >> > about > >> > the clarity of his thinking. > >> > > >> > The next step is to get suspicious whenever > anyone > >> > talks about "THE > >> > concept/meaning/idea/notion" of ANYTHING. > >> > > >> > Most people are ready to concede that "notion", > in > >> > the sense of a fleeting > >> > bit of consciousness, obtains only in a mind. > >> > Granted, when I hear a given > >> > word, > >> > the notion that arises in my mind is likely to > seem > >> > near-identical to what > >> > arose the last time I heard the word (though > less > >> > often than one might expect; > >> > in my lifetime, the notion stirred by my > hearing > >> > 'Stalin', 'Enron', 'Muslim', > >> > 'Islam', 'terrorism', 'cancer', 'liberal', 'Mel > >> > Gibson', 'Supreme Court', > >> > 'intelligence', and more has evolved a good > deal). > >> > > >> > But there is something about our brains that > tends > >> > to "reify" a frequently > >> > entertained notion, especially if we believe > others > >> > are entertaining the > >> > "same" > >> > notion. Thus 'a' concept becomes 'the' concept > of > >> > something. > >> > > >> > And so it is that, in a not-throught-through, > fuzzy > >> > way, we come think of > >> > concepts and meanings as being extra-mental > >> > entities. Discrete, stable words > >> > -- > >> > like 'authentic' -- are constant abetters to > this > >> > confusion. So when I say > >> > 'authentic', I assume "THE meaning of" the word > will > >> > arise in your mind just > >> > as it > >> > was in my mind when I spoke. > > > > > > ************** > > Gas prices getting you down? > > Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. > >
